MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404461609 · doi:10.5531/cbc.ncep.0129

Communicating about Environmental Issues: A Great Lakes Case Study

2009· report· en· W4404461609 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jane Lenz Elder, Marian Farrior

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Communicating about environmental issues can be a complex but vital component of conservation. The Great Lakes have long been influenced by human activity—logging, fishing, agriculture, urbanization—that have resulted in degradation of the ecosystem, e.g., through overexploitation, pollution and invasive species. The policy responses to these problems reflect the challenge of the issue that needs to involve numerous communities and states in the U.S. and Canada. Examples of several recent Great Lakes communications campaigns illustrate different approaches for making the connection between issues and audiences.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.506

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0170.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments→French-language works237,207→